Collection: Justice, Power and Resistance Editors’ Choice

 

Enjoy free access to our journal Editors’ top articles from recent issues. Access these articles for free until 31 July 2025.

Editors Choice JPR

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items

Authors: and

In this article we investigate the harmful effects of the 2018 Upper Secondary School Act (the ‘Study Law’) upon young people in Sweden who have sought to regularise their stay with the help of this law. We analyse these harmful impacts as ‘legal violence’: structural and symbolic violence embedded in or intensified by law (Menjívar and Abrego, 2012), in the context of Swedish welfare regulation.

The Study Law was ostensibly enacted to provide a new opportunity for some 7,000 young people, the majority of whom had fled Afghanistan. These young people had sought asylum in Sweden in 2015, but had not had their needs for protection recognised, instead being subjected to exclusionary laws, policies and growing racism. The Study Law substituted the possibility of protection with strict requirements of study, work and conduct, while the social and material support needed to fulfil these requirements largely was withheld.

In our analysis, we draw upon interviews with young people collected as part of a doctoral research project, legal materials, and our own, earlier joint experiences as legal practitioners working with those affected by this law. The legal violence of the Study Law, we argue, has produced individual and social harms, particularly impacting the lives of young people seeking asylum. The law has created a complex and hard-to-navigate, legally-violent regime that, directly and indirectly, has exacerbated hardships and facilitated suffering and even death.

Full Access

Over the past two decades, UK counterterrorism efforts have involved contentious legal and social measures aimed at preventing harm and increasing security. Critical scholars argue that these measures narrowly define security, risk, and harm, failing to recognise intervention itself as a potential threat to individuals and communities. Despite significant critical research, the legitimacy of the criminal justice model of counterterrorism persists in criminological scholarship. This article uses zemiology, the study of social harm, to critique contemporary counterterrorism’s impact. It employs UK counterterrorism as its case study, highlighting its ‘security first’ approach and its narrow definition of public interest. Three key arguments are advanced: first, counterterrorism is not an exceptional extension of criminal law but a form of hybrid governance; second, viewing this governance through a crime-centric lens obscures the harms of criminalisation and overlooks non-criminalised politically-motivated violence; third, examining counterterrorism through a social harm lens allows for a focus on social and racial structures, rather than state-defined categories of harm. The social harm perspective challenges the conceptualisation of terrorism as a crisis justifying exceptional measures, highlighting instead counterterrorism’s broader social impact. The zemiological approach highlights the role of law, not just as source of protection, but also as a means of repression and state violence, emphasising state accountability and providing a framework for identifying and preventing social harm. This perspective centres the broader implications of counterterrorism policies on social structures and racial dynamics, allowing for a more comprehensive understanding of security and harm.

Open access
Authors: and

This article explores the multifaceted experiences and impacts of criminalisation on activists, focusing on the case of the Greenpeace activists arrested and trialled for occupying a gas terminal at the port of Zeebrugge, Belgium. Frustrated by their exclusion from political decision making and the ineffectiveness of traditional protest methods, environmental movements and groups like Greenpeace are increasingly turning to more contentious forms of protest, including non-violent civil disobedience. Our research highlights the significant relevance of studying civil disobedience within the broader context of the politics of crime. It reveals critical insights into how acts of civil disobedience are criminalised and the subsequent consequences for those involved. Through interviews with the activists, Greenpeace representatives, supporters, experts, and defence lawyers, as well as by attending the hearing, analysing media reporting, the judicial decision, and legislative developments, the article demonstrates that the criminalisation process was perceived as a form of intimidation, believed to have a ‘chilling effect’ on future civil disobedience in environmental activism. The criminalisation case reveals, therefore, significant impacts on the activists involved, their organisation, and the broader activist community, underscoring the need for continued scrutiny of legal measures that may threaten the right to protest.

Full Access
Author:

Legal responses to domestic abuse have been a political priority of the UK Government since at least 2010, eventually leading to the passing of the seminal legislation in this area for England and Wales, the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. However, the exclusion of protection for migrant victim-survivors with precarious immigration statuses under the Act demonstrates a failure in understanding that the experience and risk of domestic abuse differ for these individuals from that of the mainstream, due to their intersectional identities as (predominantly) migrant women. Many migrant victim-survivors still find themselves trapped in abusive situations, as the law fails to safeguard their rights to reside legally should they choose to present themselves to authorities by reporting their abuse. A distinct lack of acknowledgment as to inequalities faced by those at the intersection of migrant status and gender (Crenshaw, 1989; 1991) has led to increased insecurity for some of the most vulnerable. This article shines a light on this discrimination under the law in England and Wales. It adopts an intersectionality framework to examine such inequality, analysing Appendix Violence Domestic Abuse and the Migrant Victim Domestic Abuse Concession in UK immigration law, as well as the Support for Migrant Victims Pilot and its relevant Evaluation Report, against the international standards of the Istanbul Convention. It argues that the UK Government is failing to tackle the problem of migrant victim-survivors’ protection concerning domestic abuse, and in some situations, has made it worse.This article aims to state the law as of 1 May 2024.

Full Access
Author:

Surveillance capitalism (Zuboff, 2019) represents an unprecedented shift in modes and asymmetries of power. Operating within and through the digital sphere, this new era of capitalism has drastic implications for our understandings of modern surveillance, corporate power, and social control. The digital, in its diffuse simultaneously online and offline form, represents the spatialisation of control within which the user and the data they produce are commodified and their identities consolidated and dissected into knowable, marketable demographics which, once reassembled, no longer represent the human being once behind them (Hammond, 2016; Brusseau, 2020). The digital represents a new frontier of harm production, as user-generated data is exploited to serve corporate interests and the normalisation of digital surveillance has given way to user apathy and technological reliance, undermining user autonomy and opportunities for resistance, while commodifying not only our identities but the entirety of the human experience. Within this context an opportunity emerges to develop a zemiology informed by the digital context that can confront the deepening harms of technologisation and consider the future of resistance. By interrogating the intersection between developments in digital technology and harm production, this article aims to acknowledge the proliferation of normalised corporate surveillance through a development in capitalism (Zuboff, 2015; 2019), and to outline opportunities for theoretical development presented by the digital context, drawing upon works within zemiology (Pemberton, 2016), surveillance studies (Murakami Wood, 2007; Murakami Wood and Ball, 2013), postphenomenology (Ihde, 1990; Verbeek, 2011; Wood, 2021; 2022), and disconnection studies (Kuntsman and Miyake, 2022), to present an invitation to both a unique theoretical orientation and an emerging field of study: digital zemiology.

Full Access
Author:

This article fills important gaps in criminology by analysing the police response to foxhunting in one English county. Despite the Hunting Act 2004 legislating against hunting with dogs, the article demonstrates how foxhunting proceeds with a ‘business as usual’ discourse. Using Vegh Weis’ (2017) under- and over-criminalisation and historical development of the criminal justice sector (CJS), the article uses foxhunting as an example of the siting of classism in ‘original criminal selectivity’ that continues to explain police practices today. The use of foxhunting is particularly pertinent given the overlap in privileged relationships not only positioned to mechanisms of criminalisation but also to the historical development of foxhunting. The article demonstrates how the under-criminalisation of foxhunting is enabling the perpetuation of violence and harms by hunts and their supporters, the latter drawing more frequently on organised violence. This violence is aimed primarily at hunt saboteurs, whose role is also examined in this article through community activism applied to an abolitionist perspective. The article concludes that the police are there to maintain hegemonic practices positioned to economic power, a relationship that is understood by the intersection of original criminal selectivity, the law and classism.

Full Access